CANTON, Ohio -- Three girls given a cautionary tour of the local juvenile lockup are suing officials, saying they got more than they bargained for, including a humiliating strip search.

Shane Hoover

Three girls given a cautionary tour of the local juvenile lockup are suing officials, saying they got more than they bargained for, including a humiliating strip search.
The girls, identified by pseudonyms in the lawsuit, say Multi-County Juvenile Attention Center workers violated their rights by subjecting them to the search, giving them dirty clothes to wear and making comments of a sexual nature.
The lawsuit was filed Tuesday in Stark County Common Pleas Court. Stark, Carroll, Columbiana, Holmes, Tuscarawas and Wayne counties oversee the Multi-County Juvenile Attention System through a Board of Trustees.
The Attention Center houses juveniles awaiting trial or other placements. It is at 815 Faircrest St. SW in Canton Township.
Stark County Sheriff Timothy Swanson confirmed that an investigator is looking into allegations concerning the search, but he said no conclusions have been reached.
Details Outlined
The encounter occurred May 18, according to the lawsuit.
The girls, ages 14, 15 and 16, and their families reported to the Attention Center for an arraignment. About a month before, Massillon police charged the girls with “criminal trespass on a public sidewalk” in connection with a fight involving several youths. Attorneys for the girls contend they were innocent bystanders.
Instead of going before a judge, a court worker told the girls the case would be over if they agreed to each perform 20 hours of community service, regularly attend school and take a 15-minute walk-through, or tour, of the Attention Center, the lawsuit says.
The girls say the walk-through turned out to be more than they expected.
Here’s what happened, according to the lawsuit:
It started with a youth leader, or guard, screaming at them. When the girls giggled out of surprise, the man continued to scream and pushed them against a wall, faces first.
The guard then took the girls to the second floor. Once there, he and two other guards, a man and a woman, made disparaging remarks about the girls, commenting on one’s breasts.
In front of other inmates, the guards made more comments of a sexual nature, asking one girl “whether she liked boys” and saying “other female inmates will love you because they love blondes.”
The female guard then led the girls, separately, into a room where they were told to remove their clothes, squat and cough, open their mouths, lift their breasts and shake their hair.
During the search, the male guards stood in the hallway, laughing, and making comments such as, “I bet they don’t think it’s funny now,” the lawsuit says.
After the searches, the female guard gave the girls filthy underwear, bras and uniforms worn by other inmates. After at least half an hour inside the Attention Center, the guards told the girls they had 30 seconds to change their clothes or they would have to stay overnight, the lawsuit says.
The plaintiffs are seeking more than $25,000 in damages.
Attorneys Brian Zimmerman and Allen Schulman Jr. said the girls’ parents never would have agreed to the walk-through if they knew it included a strip search. They say the search was illegal and unnecessary because the girls and their parents had already gone through a metal detector and pat-down search upon entering the Attention Center.
Officials Respond
According to the lawsuit, the girls’ parents contacted court personnel after the tour, but Court Administrator Richard DeHeer told them the Attention Center staff acted within its protocol.
Reached Tuesday, DeHeer said he would like to comment on the allegations but couldn’t at this time.
Multi-County Superintendent Donald Thernes also declined to comment. Nor would he say what is included in a walk-through at the Attention Center.
Zimmerman and Schulman have based the lawsuit on statements made by the girls and their parents. They don’t know who may have observed the alleged events and have yet to identify the Attention Center guards involved.
The attorneys contend the Attention Center is concealing or has destroyed a video of the events captured by surveillance cameras.
“We can’t believe any judge would know about this and not stop it,” Zimmerman said.
Stark County Family Court Judge David E. Stucki handled arraignments at the Attention Center the day of the tour. He isn’t listed as a defendant and said he wouldn’t talk about a pending lawsuit.
Speaking generally, the judge said some cases are handled informally, which avoids the creation of a record for the juvenile defendants. The cases involve low-level offenses such as underage consumption, truancy or unruliness, Stucki said.
Each case is different, but informal resolutions can include a curfew, community service, mental-health or substance-abuse treatment or a walk-through of the Attention Center.
The tour is to show youths what will happen if they don’t follow the rules.
Stucki said he doesn’t know specifically what the walk-through includes.
Zimmerman and Schulman said they want to know if other kids are being subjected to strip searches during tours.
Asked Schulman: “What would you do if this was your child?”
Canton Repository

Community Info

Original content available for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons license, except where noted.
The Lake News Online ~ 918 N. Business Route 5, Camdenton, MO 65020 ~ Privacy Policy ~ Terms Of Service